Apr 1, 2005 12:00 PM, By Ian Marsh, principal, Withers LLP, London, and Michael Ben Jacob, principal, Withers Bergman LLP,

By: By Ian Marsh, principal, Withers LLP, London, and Michael Ben Jacob, principal, Withers Bergman LLP,

A New York judge's recent decision in Estate of Dumont¹ should give trustees reason to pause and re-evaluate the investment policies and procedures of any trust for which they act, that is governed by or may come to be governed by New York law. The judge held a trustee liable — to the tune of $21 million — for failing to diversify Eastman Kodak stock when its share prices fell in the 1970s, even though the trust's settlor specifically instructed that the Kodak stock not be sold solely for diversification reasons.

The July 13, 2004, decision by Monroe County, N.Y. Surrogate Judge Edmund A. Calvaruso in Dumont makes fascinating reading, particularly for anybody brought up in the English common law tradition. The decision highlights some significant distinctions between the law in New York (which many English practitioners view as typical of that of the United States) and that in England (which, of course, underpins the law in most “offshore jurisdictions”).

T&E Premium Content

To read the rest of this article, please login to our Premium Content section:

Registered Web Site Users
User Name:
Password:
Remember Me